The Greenwich Planning & Zoning Commission again considered and application from Eagleview Holding, LLC to demolish the Greenwich Woods Nursing Home, a 217-bed facility, and build a four-story, 170-unit assisted housing development where 30% of the proposed units (equal to 51 units) would be designated “affordable” per State Statutes, with parking for 294 vehicles.
The application is submitted under the state’s 8-30g affordable housing statute, which means for towns where less than 10% of housing is deemed affordable, zoning regs are waived, including regulations on FAR and stories.
The exception is in cases where substantial concerns about public health and safety rise higher than the need for affordable housing.
The proposed King Street 8-30g would result in a building that is non-conforming with respect to minimum green area, allowable floor area and stories.
Previously the applicant had proposed 215 units in a five-story building, so the 4-story building with 170 units was a reduction.
The property, located at 1165 King Street, is in the RA-4 Zone, and is just shy of 16 acres.
During the P&Z commission meeting, the wastewater service situation was a great concern.
The property has a unique sewer agreement with Westchester County that expires on Dec 31, 2064.
Now the proposal is for an on-site wastewater treatment plant to be created after agreement with Westchester expires.
The catch is that the sewer agreement requires approval from the Connecticut DEEP, but those approvals aren’t granted or even reviewed until after Greenwich zoning approval is granted.
To assist the commission’s review, P&Z enlisted the help of CDM Smith, the town’s sewer consultants who have professional experience in building similar facilities in the state.
Greenwich Woods at 1165 King Street in Greenwich. June 27, 2025
Attorney Tom Heagney said the application received approval from the town’s Wetlands Agency and the affordable housing trust fund board support the project and agreed to provide a loan to make the application qualify as an assisted housing application.
Heagney said a meeting took place with Westchester County’s Environmental Department.
“We were not able to get that far, but we haven’t given up on that. Those discussions will be ongoing,” he said.
Mr. Heagney said the applicant had been seeking an increase in the wastewater flow when there were 215 units proposed, and an extension on the 2064 expiration date. But with the fewer number of proposed units (170 unit) an increase in flow is not necessary.
Heagney noted that the Greens at Greenwich, adjacent at 1155 King St, is also part of the wastewater agreement with Westchester as that development was built by the same company as Greenwich Woods back in the 1980s.
He said if there was no extension of the Westchester agreement by 2059, then the owners would move ahead with the design of the alternate wastewater treatment plant and take that to the DEEP.
Ms Alban said the commission’s main concern was for the residents in the affordable units and suggested the concern rose to the level of substantial health and safety.
“For now, until 2064, this (agreement) is okay at the reduced number of units. The issue for us, from a health and safety standpoint, is that it isn’t the 40 years of the deed restriction term. Now our debate is that we have to make sure that because of that affordability issue and the health and safety of the below-market tenants – because if it was all market (rate) units, it wouldn’t be as much of a concern,” said P&Z chair Margarita Alban.
Commission member Anne Noel Jones said she was also concerned.
“Answer the scenario where we’re getting to: Westchester (wastewater capacity) is maxed out, and in 2060 or whenever you approach them, dumping treated effluent into the Byram River is no longer an option and your soil isn’t great for dealing with (wastewater) on site. What are you thinking you might do?”
Heagney said the current facility pays Westchester a six-figure fee annually, and that meant Westchester might be willing to discuss an extension.
“Don’t count on it. We have heard that Westchester is very tight for capacity since you were last here,” Alban said. “They’ve told Port Chester they need to do something about how much they’re sending to the plants.”
“They’ve told Port Chester they need to get their act together. It means they’re tight for capacity,” she added.
As for Westchester, Mr. Heagney added, “Although it was not stated, the impression I had was if we had some support for expanding our sewer capacity, we would be more amenable to an extension of our agreement.”
Gigi Ma from S.E. Minor & Co, said her firm was brought in to focus on designing a back-up system.
“While we know DEEP does not review a theoretical project like this, we did explore the discharge options with them on an informal basis,” Ms Ma said.
“Don’t forget that when an administration changes, you can’t count on anything that isn’t written with them,” Alban said. “They’ve changed mid-stream on us, we know how difficult it can be.”
“They have a lot of construction going on and they’ve indicated they have to put Westchester first,” Heagney said.
Rich Granoff, part of the applicant’s team, said that in the 30-year period there’s “a decent chance” that Westchester will expand their sewer capacity.
Option two, he said, was for the applicant to design and build a wastewater treatment plant that would either dispose treated water into the Byram River or on site.
“Option three is – if they can’t get what we need from Westchester, and can’t build a wastewater treatment plant, in 30 years, the building will probably be worth $500,000,000,” Granoff said. “They will go find a piece of land and dispose on that site.”
Ms Alban noted a new state law that became effective in 2024 allows conversion of nursing homes to residential with a quick review, and suggested the applicant consider that route.
“It’s quick and fast. If you had that option – and you have to stay within the existing square feet – have you considered that at all?” she asked.
“You could then do the 8-30g affordable component with some more market rate units as the second half of your project,” Alban suggested. “You could come back in and build a second building.”
“The fundamental problem is the current owners, the sellers – we have a deal to buy it – and if we say we are building 100,000 sq ft instead of 300,000 sq ft, that makes the property worth 1/3 of what they’re selling it for,” Granoff said. “They would keep it as a nursing home.”
“Except 1/3 of your current payment is related to the affordables. What I’ve heard in the grapevine in the last couple weeks, is that the margins associated with building 8-30g’s, for developers, is very tight,” Alban said. “We know there are projects throughout Fairfield County that have become not feasible and are not going forward.”
“A third of what you would give up is your below-market (units),” she added. “Already a third of it doesn’t generate profit.”
Granoff said from a developer’s standpoint in Greenwich the market rate units subsidize the affordable.
“It really works,” he said.
“The financing is getting wobbly on 8-30gs,” Alban said.
“We’re proud of the fact we can offer 51 (affordable) units,” Granoff said. “We are fully committed to getting this project approved any way that we have to.”
“Market rate apartments in Greenwich, what has transpired in the past two years – our 6-110 project I just finished – check out the rents on the market rates,” he said.
(The 6-110 regulation is the Town’s workforce housing reg, which was used for example for new development at the site of the former Friendly’s building in Cos Cob.)
“We know these numbers,” Alban said.
“This is not just about needing affordable housing in Greenwich. It’s about needing housing, and our POCD is very clear that we need alternative housing at every affordable level,” Granoff said.
At the end of discussion, Ms Alban listed open concerns, the primary one being the continued unease about the sewer issue.
She asked if the applicant would be willing to return to the Architectural Review Committee.
“With all due respect to the architects, I’ve never thought of the aesthetics of the building as being a health and safety issue,” Mr. Heagney said.
“The reason people go to the ARC on an 8-30g is a gesture of goodwill. There is no obligation,” Alban said.
The application remains open.
Also from Aug 5, 2025 P&Z meeting:
Neighbor Complaints of Toyota Dealer Light Spillage Dominates P&Z Discussion of Application
More on Eagleview Holding proposal at Greenwich Woods:
P&Z Watch: Greenwich Woods New 8-30g Proposal is 4-Story Apartment Building on King Street
June 29, 2025
Dec 17, 2023
P&Z Watch: New Pre-Application for 8-30g North of Merritt on King Street
Nov 24, 2022
See also:
St Paul’s Church Proposed Subdivision Rankles Neighbors in Riverside
Up to the Minute Greenwich Property Transfers July 3-8, 2025